Poor Album Review in Uncut Music Magazine

[The Shift]

The thing about reviews in consumer mags is that they're in the same domain as the albums themselves – the entertainment industry. The reviewers write to entertain us, the readers, not to put together some scientific analysis. Whether you agree with them or disagree with them, the point is that if you react, you're being entertained. Just as you;re being entertained whether you like TWGMTR or not.

[MBE]

That's the thing, when I write for publication I make sure that a) I know the history of the artists involved, b) that I can offer an informed opinion but make it clear that, besides the known facts, my view still just an opinion. Why I became a writer was because I was tired of smart ass reviewers who cavalierly write about people they aren't versed on. It may or may not be a solid album, but we should judge that for ourselves as people who know the story, and the history of the music.

[obscurereference]

Moot point (that review, I mean) -

could well be that, if the writer is unknown, he/she wants to make a name for him/herself by working against the mood of today (admit it: Brian and the BBs, by TSS for example, are riding a high wave nowadays, and the current shows are really good by all accounts, not just 'retro-good for inducing nostalgia). And what better way than give TWGMTR a mark that would be termed: insufficient, in Dutch school lingo?

We in Holland have a respected writer, by the way, working for a quality newspaper, who did exactly the same with Bri's 'Presents Smile' and subsequent works. He is a good reviewer, but aging, and I ascribe his odd and really unbelievable/incredible vendetta against Brian to the same mechanism.

People with problems and/or grudges and/or over-ambition usually resort to these tactics, folks.

That said, in all fairness, Uncut is a very good rock mag.

But I am not impressed in the slightest, and will wait. Until the CD/LP materialises.

Or, y'know, the reviewer might just not be that keen on the album. One of the two.

I don't think it's fair to question the motives of a reviewer just because they don't like our favourite band's new album. As you say, Uncut is a good magazine.

[MBE]

It is a good magazine, but I feel the guy doesn't understand what this means to their history.

[Alan Smith]

Whether you agree with them or disagree with them, the point is that if you react, you're being entertained. Just as you're being entertained whether you like TWGMTR or not.

And if you're entertained, you may well purchase said mag and others like it (including the 20 years later edition review where previously witheld credibility may be bestowed)

[The Heartical Don]

Whether you agree with them or disagree with them, the point is that if you react, you're being entertained. Just as you're being entertained whether you like TWGMTR or not.

And if you're entertained, you may well purchase said mag and others like it (including the 20 years later edition review where previously witheld credibility may be bestowed)

  so true...

[kookadams]

In this day and age who knows sh*t about anything anymore? The reunion, the tour, the album is a goshdarn milestone for christ sake! Naysayers speak out of jealousy and their opinions are hogwash. There are a handful of Beach Boys albums that haven't gotten the greatest reviews and it don't mean they're not amazing albums; critics get paid to criticize and push their horseshit on the masses. As a youth who's spent the majority of his life absorbing and dissecting the Beach Boys I find it amusing seeing what idiocy people spew out. The legends are dieing off more and more and as true music zealots we gotta preserve the greats while we still got em!
~BEACH BOYS FOREVER!~






facebook.com/kookadams

[Amy B.]

Wait, so you're complaining about someone who listened to the album and gave his unvarnished opinion? Every person on this board will do the exact same thing when the album is released, only won't be paid for it.

I have to say, based on the clips I agree with some of the things the reviewer was saying.

[Tristero]

Who cares what music mags think?

Typical rock music magazine thinking.  "Blah blah blah The Beatles, blah blah blah The Sex Pistols, blah blah blah U2, blah blah blah Oasis, blah blah blah Coldplay".

Anyone else is always going to be considered secondary.

I dunno, I've always gotten the impression that Uncut and Mojo hold Brian Wilson and the Beach Boys in very high esteem.  There was a lot of hoopla surrounding SMiLE, both the Brian Wilson version and the recent box.  I don't think they would be so quick to dismiss a new album featuring all of the surviving members as more of a 'hipster' Spin type of publication might.  It's just one guy's opinion, of course, but I guess fans should brace themselves for more of the same, though I expect a mixture of different reactions.

[Ron]

My dog heard a few snippets on the album, and he gives it a solid 10. 

[The Heartical Don]

My dog heard a few snippets on the album, and he gives it a solid 10. 

That's the litmus test, Ron. Please treat your dog to a behemoth-sized Triple Mac tonight, in honour of Brian Wilson.

[Wirestone]

Who cares what music mags think?

Typical rock music magazine thinking.  "Blah blah blah The Beatles, blah blah blah The Sex Pistols, blah blah blah U2, blah blah blah Oasis, blah blah blah Coldplay".

Anyone else is always going to be considered secondary.

I dunno, I've always gotten the impression that Uncut and Mojo hold Brian Wilson and the Beach Boys in very high esteem.  There was a lot of hoopla surrounding SMiLE, both the Brian Wilson version and the recent box.  I don't think they would be so quick to dismiss a new album featuring all of the surviving members as more of a 'hipster' Spin type of publication might.  It's just one guy's opinion, of course, but I guess fans should brace themselves for more of the same, though I expect a mixture of different reactions.

Uncut published one of the nastiest hit pieces on BW in recent memory, after Imagination was released. Really vile stuff -- anonymous quotes, unflattering pics (from the wrong era), lots of Monster Melinda talk. I've not bothered with them since. It was simply cruel.

[Landlocked]

It is a good magazine, but I feel the guy doesn't understand what this means to their history.

Their history is irrelevant to the quality of the music. If the reviewer thinks that it's overly processed, saccharine crap, or on the other side of the spectrum, that it's a work of genius, the fact that it's a miracle these guys came back together won't change that.

[Biggus Dikkus]

It isn't a terrible song, I actually thought it was more of a 7.0/10, was expecting far worse. The mastering is kind of what kills me, but whatever, its a fun Beach Boys song, and I'm very happy they've gotten back together and are putting an effort into the album. I am a little worried about Brian, it just seems like he doesn't want to be there, he looks very distant--sad even. I hope he puts himself before this tour, would hate to see the guy get too pressured.

[buddhahat]

Wait, so you're complaining about someone who listened to the album and gave his unvarnished opinion? Every person on this board will do the exact same thing when the album is released, only won't be paid for it.

Please post more often, voice of sanity.

[buddhahat]

It is a good magazine, but I feel the guy doesn't understand what this means to their history.

Their history is irrelevant to the quality of the music. If the reviewer thinks that it's overly processed, saccharine crap, or on the other side of the spectrum, that it's a work of genius, the fact that it's a miracle these guys came back together won't change that.

Exactly. Why should every reviewer offset their opinion against the band's personal history? That's nonsense! Maybe with BWPS, Brian's personal story was important, but only because it was integral to, and referenced, within the work itself. The major benchmarks that reviewers go on are: Does this sound good? What is the artist saying? How does it relate to music and culture today? Not "These guys have got back together - we should be grateful. Let's give them an easy ride to ensure they release more albums."

[meltedwhiskeyinmyhand]

The guy didnt say anything that hasnt been said here a million times before (probably more). Who cares what he thinks?

[b00ts]

It is a good magazine, but I feel the guy doesn't understand what this means to their history.

Their history is irrelevant to the quality of the music. If the reviewer thinks that it's overly processed, saccharine crap, or on the other side of the spectrum, that it's a work of genius, the fact that it's a miracle these guys came back together won't change that.

Exactly. Why should every reviewer offset their opinion against the band's personal history? That's nonsense! Maybe with BWPS, Brian's personal story was important, but only because it was integral to, and referenced, within the work itself. The major benchmarks that reviewers go on are: Does this sound good? What is the artist saying? How does it relate to music and culture today? Not "These guys have got back together - we should be grateful. Let's give them an easy ride to ensure they release more albums."

That's ridiculous. Everybody on and off this board should agree that this album is flawless because we're
lucky to have it. Groupthink 101.

[Runaways]

I really want this album to be viewed as another beach boys album, not the 50th anniversary album.  Which means no historical context please

[Disney Boy (1985)]

Maybe the new albums going to be a bit crap and we all secretly suspect that it's going to be a bit crap and that's why this review has generated such a strong reaction here, because it's played to all our fears. Certainly all the things i was worried the BB's would do on this album - schmaltz, corny nostalgia, auto-tuning, lame songs - are all brought up in this review, much to my disappointment. Of course i may yet happily discover that the reviewer is talking out of his arse, but a part of me sadly suspects not.

[Runaways]

Maybe the new albums going to be a bit crap and we all secretly suspect that it's going to be a bit crap and that's why this review has generated such a strong reaction here, because it's played to all our fears. Certainly all the things i was worried the BB's would do on this album - schmaltz, corny nostalgia, auto-tuning, lame songs - are all brought up in this review, much to my disappointment. Of course i may yet happily discover that the reviewer is talking out of his arse, but a part of me sadly suspects not.

The only place I'm expected something really good is the last three songs, so I don't have issue with the review Celt When he says Brian's melancholy seems fake 

[b00ts]

Maybe the new albums going to be a bit crap and we all secretly suspect that it's going to be a bit crap and that's why this review has generated such a strong reaction here, because it's played to all our fears. Certainly all the things i was worried the BB's would do on this album - schmaltz, corny nostalgia, auto-tuning, lame songs - are all brought up in this review, much to my disappointment. Of course i may yet happily discover that the reviewer is talking out of his arse, but a part of me sadly suspects not.

I've been able to hear most of the record.

The review is right about some stuff - there's shmaltz, corny nostalgia, auto-tuning and at least one really lame song ("Beaches in Mind"), maybe two if you count "Daybreak over the Ocean," although I like that song well enough.

There are also 11 tracks with great melodies; three superb tracks that open the album, and three superb tracks that close the album.

For Beach Boys fans, this album is surely a good one, and far from the worst thing we could get. In terms of consistent quality and conceptual (if not musical) unity, it beats out any album since MIU in my opinion. For non-fans or casual fans, there is much to criticize, but that won't affect my enjoyment of the record. I am going to listen the sh*t out of it.

[Zach95]

Maybe the new albums going to be a bit crap and we all secretly suspect that it's going to be a bit crap and that's why this review has generated such a strong reaction here, because it's played to all our fears. Certainly all the things i was worried the BB's would do on this album - schmaltz, corny nostalgia, auto-tuning, lame songs - are all brought up in this review, much to my disappointment. Of course i may yet happily discover that the reviewer is talking out of his arse, but a part of me sadly suspects not.

I've been able to hear most of the record.

The review is right about some stuff - there's shmaltz, corny nostalgia, auto-tuning and at least one really lame song ("Beaches in Mind"), maybe two if you count "Daybreak over the Ocean," although I like that song well enough.

There are also 11 tracks with great melodies; three superb tracks that open the album, and three superb tracks that close the album.

For Beach Boys fans, this album is surely a good one, and far from the worst thing we could get. In terms of consistent quality and conceptual (if not musical) unity, it beats out any album since MIU in my opinion. For non-fans or casual fans, there is much to criticize, but that won't affect my enjoyment of the record. I am going to listen the sh*t out of it.

That was refreshing.  Thank you Boots, you're a good man for your voice of reason. Because of that, I take your review to heart much more than a lot of the others we've seen out there.

[EgoHanger1966]

I really want this album to be viewed as another beach boys album, not the 50th anniversary album.  Which means no historical context please

I could see why you would want that, but it's not happening. The lyrics to most of the songs reference the fact that it's a reunion album, there's references all over to the past, the band's history, the fact that they are getting older but can still crank out the tunes etc.

It doesn't make it any less of an album, but it's gonna be the 50th anniversary album, enjoy it for exactly what it is and I think we'll get more out of it.

[Ron]

I didn't read the review.